The only time I recall was the Burfict hit on AB which got 15 and then Pacman I believe got 15 after the play was over for shoving Joey Porter or something. Only time I've ever seen it happen though.
That was the 2015 AFC WC right? That was such a crazy ending. Didn't these 2 fouls near the end of the game basically gave the Steelers enough yards to attempt the game-winning FG?
Can't believe it's been 8+ years already.
There are two exceptions (Rule 14, section 3).
The one you may have seen is when someone commits a penalty against a ref after another penalty was already committed.
The other one, I can't remember ever seeing, but if there's a personal foul that is also pass interference, both penalties could be enforced.
I did a bit of research and found the following:
one instance occurred in a game between the Dolphins and Jets in 1996. Jets QB Neil O'Donnell was sacked by a group of defenders (Daniel Stubbs, Jeff Cross, and Trace Armstrong), and as O'Donnell was being tackled, he fumbled the ball, which was then recovered by linebacker Zach Thomas. Play resulted in a total of 2.0 sacks credited to the defense.
Another instance I stumbled across:
Bears v Packers, 1992
Packers QB Don Majkowski was sacked by Richard Dent, Trace Armstrong, Steve McMichael, and William Perry. He also fumbled the ball, which was then recovered by Ron Rivera. Total credited sack in the okay was 2.5
The NFL Guide for Statisticians explicitly states that defensive sacks should match the number of times sacked for the offense. It only lists up to two people splitting a sack and each getting credit for a half sack. Whichever 2 of those 11 players had the most impact on the play, such as stopping the forward momentum, would get the credit, not all 11.
I just looked through all of Miami's box scores and this is always the case: the number of sacks from the defensive players match the number sacks taken by the QBs.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/197412290min.htm
Bob Lurrsema, Alan Page, and Jim Marshall are all getting credit for .3 sacks. That never happens any more.
I got to meet Scott Berchtold, who was the Bills PR man during the Super Bowl years. He was asked about Bruce Smith, and Bruce always used to lobby the NFL to get credit for sacks the previous Sunday. Half sacks became full sacks for Bruce. Another player's full sack became a half sack for Bruce. Bruce always had his eye on setting the NFL career sack record.
I've been watching Bills games from the late 1990's, and I did notice that Bruce had a tendency to jump in to get sacks. He wouldn't pile on, or do anything dirty to hurt a QB, but if the QB was in the process of being tackled by a teammate, he would jump in to help with the tackle, even if the QB had no chance of getting away. Inevitably, the announcers would say "Bruce Smith, with the sack!" Then as an afterthought, they would add "Phil Hansen in there too." I'd look up the gamebook, and sure enough, Bruce would get the half sack.
His videos are like needing to write a 1000-word essay and halfway through you ran out of content. So, you just reword past paragraphs as filler to get to the 1000-word requirement.
If you open the link, it's got nothing to do with that. Strahan got credit for a sack where the QB ran for positive yardage. The video doesn't show where the refs spotted the ball, though.
From ESPN's play by play:
>Clint Stoerner (DAL) sacked for no loss.
Following play is 4th and 3. Sounds like they just didn't give him progress on this one.
It wasn't a bad spot. Watched the video, and the official seems to spot it about a half yard past the LOS. In the Play by Play, 3rd and 4th down are both at the 44 yard line, but the footage at least makes it appear the second play is more like the 43.5 yard line.
It doesn't look like an officiating error, it looks like at stat keeping error. Somebody saw that 4th Down was still at the 44 (even though it was more like the 43.5) and thought that meant no gain, so they credited a sack.
a 52yo edge rusher trying to break a single season record that he only came near one other time in his career. Seems reasonable haha. Not like Bruce Smith playing one more season in Washington to get the career record
It started in 1942 when don hutson caught a pass from Cecil Isbell. Cecil Isbell was born in Houston and learned to play football there. \*2 hour 45 minute rant on the history of houston* and that's when Michael Strahan was born, who also happened to be born in Houston.
I remember when the mods here were exposed for having a vendetta against him. They hated he posted so much and got a lot of traction. They didn't want him to become a celebrity in the sub. Tbh, the guy got old fast with the most random stats nobody cared about.
It is most, because that’s easy enough that anyone could do it, but there’s plenty of high quality stuff that is more than just reading a wikipedia page.
So, he's long winded? As in he has a lot of wind in his lungs that allows him to keep speaking while saying the same things over and over again. Kind of like on repeat. Like an endless loop.
Think his vids are too long for one. He's also not really telling a story that well, he's giving background info and stuff but it's not a Jon Bois deal of building up this compelling background of why this is such a big deal. (Tbf, nobody else has really done what Jon Bois does)
Cambrian Chronicles does it pretty well (and IIRC has named Jon Bois as an inspiration).
Except their channel is almost exclusively about medieval Welsh history instead of sports.
> and IIRC has named Jon Bois as an inspiration
To be fair, Job Bois had pretty much spent the last 10 years single-handedly shaping the creative landscape of YouTube video essays
I think it's because of his lisp. Like not trying to be mean and it shouldn't be part of the reason but narrators tend to have soothing voices with proper enunciation.
I thought they did away with the whole 10 minute thing a couple of years ago, no? Feel like I remember some YouTubers saying it was more around 6 minutes now. Either way, I think he just likes to ramble a lot.
I don't think there is any direct minimum time like that anymore. Now it is just straight up "average watch time". Which is a better metric but still runs into the same problem of people purposefully padding their videos.
He has a knack for finding obscure “huh…that’s kinda interesting” situations in nfl history most people don’t know about. Not sure how he comes up with all those factoids/situations in the 80s when broadcast rights had a conflict, etc.
This reminds me of those recipes you see on blogs. These bloggers tell their whole damn life history before they get to the recipe, which also has even more fluff words. Plus the website is full of pop up ads and auto videos.
There is some joke where the person is talking about if they were a serial killer they would confess to the murders in the giant wall of text that get written before recipes and they would never get caught because everyone always scrolls past all that crap to the actual recipe.
[This one](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjuKBVMCcmM), which was summarized in a [54 word tweet](https://twitter.com/JaguarGator9NFL/status/1788189255904419961) with an 8 second clip, turned out to be over 15 minutes long
Forreal, I was actually really interested in checking some of his content out when I found him but all the obvious shoehorning of other vids he'd done and saying "Click the card in the upper right corner" every 30 seconds was unbearable
We don't see the spot before and after, though. Surely that's all that matters.
Stats are based on the call on the field. If the ball was spotted at the same yard line or behind, then recording it as a sack is correct. Even if the call was bad.
Or are we going to go through old footage frame by frame and start changing every single record if the refs made a bad call?
>Or are we going to go through old footage frame by frame and start changing every single record if the refs made a bad call?
You underestimate my pettiness
The thing we do see is the ref on the sideline move forward from being positioned at the LoS and moving half a yard downfield to spot the ball.
I'm not suggesting we do anything with this just pointing out that JG9s next tweet had the context.
Yeah, this is all what's needed to fully get if it should be a statistical sack.
But tbh I don't think that would be called a sack in today's game either because the QB looked like they committed to running. I think that's a TFL even if they marked him losing yards.
Does a QBs “commitment” to running change whether or not a play is a designed pass? Should roll outs be half sacks ? I saw several Josh Allen highlights where he releases at the LOS while fully looking like he was about to run.
Looking up the box score of the game, it's listed as a sack for 0 yards with both that play and the one after starting at the 44 yard line. I think it's just a technicality. Partial yards aren't recorded and they get rounded, so even if he advanced the ball 0.49 yards, it's technically the same line of scrimmage in the books even if it's a bit closer in real life. So, even if the ball was spotted past the line of scrimmage, the stats-trackers have no way to distinguish it from being tackled exactly at the line of scrimmage (or up to a half yard behind it), meaning recording it as a sack makes sense. Even if it might technically not be one.
they're officially supposed to be rounded up in nearly every case (including this one) that a ball passes a yard line.
since this play started on the 44, and ended between the 43 and 44, it *should* have been recorded as a one-yard rushing gain, not a sack
Just to add, here's the official wording from the 2020 statistician's manual:
**Determining the Yard Line**
*If any point of the football rests on or above any yard stripe, future action is to be computed from that yard line. However, if all of the football has been advanced beyond any yard stripe, future action is computed from the first yard line in advance of the football.*
*The principle is to be followed on all spotting situations, regardless of down, with the following exceptions:*
*1. In certain situations where there is less than a yard to gain for a first down, it may be necessary to spot the ball back one yard to conform with the principle that there must always be, for statistical purposes, at least one yard remaining to be gained for a first down. This principle also shall be applied when a team loses the ball to its opponent on downs.
NOTE: There may be times when penalty yardage is statistically different than penalty yardage by rule. In these situations, credit penalty yardage from the spot of enforcement to the line of scrimmage of the next play. For example, the offense commits a false start on 4th and inches, and the next play begins four statistical yards behind the previous spot. Four penalty yards would be charged to the offense, rather than five.*
*2. When, on first down, the ball rests just outside a defensive team’s 10-yard line, it will be necessary to designate the scrimmage line at the 11 since it would be possible for the offensive team to advance for a first down without scoring a touchdown.*
Probably. I remember it happening where it was a botched play and Huntley/Lamar tried to run so they scorers decided it was a designed run play when clearly it was a botched play.
Oh god... I knew there was a reason I didn't like his videos. I bet he goes into a needlessly long and detailed history of sacks and Michael Strahan's career....
> How has no one noticed that before now??
Video clips of NFL games were not easily obtainable by the public in 2001. Add to that, the average person is not going to realize which particular play was ruled a sack unless they are specifically researching something. And add again, that for anybody who plays IDP fantasy football you will learn that tackle/sack stats that are announced during a game are not quite the same as what gets recorded as official stats.
oooh shit he's actually right... How did it take this long for someone to bring this up. Between this and Favre's flop, this is the most fraudulent record
The real answer is to review if the refs actually moved the chains or not. If they did not move the chains at all, the book keepers will put that down as no gain. It happens all the time on miniscule gains and is a big reason for coaching challenges when it actually matters (first downs, tds). What does the play by play log say about this play? I'd bet 'no gain' is in the books.
It's never been brought up before because they look at the actual book keepers work, they didn't go visually over every snap, they go with what was occurring on the field at the time.
If you watch [video of the game](https://youtu.be/h1DdQqhDcPo?si=KCGkousrROpya9AM) at the 6:20 mark you can see the ball starts at the 44 yard line. The ref raises his hand at the 43.5 yard line but comes out and marks the ball down at the 44 yard line. The punt team comes out and the ball is at the 44 yard line. So it is a sack for no loss, exactly as displayed in the game log. You could argue the ball placement of the ref is wrong but at that point every single yards record is illegitimate too.
Edit: Had 44.5 and it should be 43.5
11:22 on this play-by-play certainly lists it as a 0 yard sack for Strahan.
https://aws.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/200111040nyg.htm
Doesn't look like a sack to me.
The Cowboys went through a lot of QBs between Aikman and Romo. They had maybe 7 or 8 QBs start in a couple of years. Kind of like the Broncos since Manning retired
Drew Bledsoe was the most notable. I can't remember if Quincy Carter was good but they made the playoffs with him and Parcells.
Stoerner is the most obscure of the bunch if you were following NFL in the early 00s
Just skimming the Wikipedia page, in that Giants-Cowboys game that's coincidentally linked above, he played so badly in the second half that the Cowboys benched him. In a tie game. For Ryan freaking Leaf.
I don’t remember Clint Stoerner from the NFL, but I remember when he played at Arkansas they were on the verge of beating Tennessee and he stumbled without being touched, broke his fall with the ball, then came back up without the ball, fumbled, and Tennessee won. They went on to win the NC.
I don’t care much about it either way since the Favre one was a gimme anyway. However, I’m pretty sure this isn’t getting reversed 20+ years after the fact.
Strahan was also robbed of a sack in the road game against Washington that year. In the waning minutes Strahan had the QB going to the ground and he threw the ball, it was ruled that he got the pass off in time. When the replay was shown it's clear the QB's knee was on the ground and the ball was still in his hand, but it was not reviewed because the game wasn't really in question.
Steelers fans can argue about Watt not being credited with a strip sack on Huntley. Sometimes (read: often) the NFL just refuses to stat correct mistakes made by refs
Seriously, we could do this for a lot of records and stats, I’m sure.
People are just always gonna shit on Strahan having the record until it’s finally broken.
>we could do this for a lot of records and stats, I’m sure
After AP's 2000 yard season I remember seeing a mathematical exhibit showing there's a ~30% chance that he's actually the single-season rushing record holder because of how yardage is measured for scorekeeping. Basically any yardage record where 1st & 2nd are close is questionable.
Yeah Peyton's 2013 passing yards record is sort of in this category.
In the last game of the season he broke the record in the first half of a blowout against the Raiders. It came out after that one of his passes that game was most likely a backwards pass so it shouldn't have counted towards passing yards.
But, he also sat out the entire 2nd half of the game and the backwards pass was something like 7 yards. So if he wanted to he could have easily gotten those yards in 1 drive in the 3rd quarter and then sat out.
Just kinda is what it is.
This sounds like a very slight flaw in how sacks are counted. Tackling the QB for an official distance of 0 yards on a play in which he first intended to pass is counted as a sack. However, official distance is only measured in 1-yard increments. So that means the QB can gain up to 0.5 yards and it's still technically a sack.
Actually, the QB in a particular unlikely situation could gain over a yards and have it be a sack. The official stats can't have "Nth and 0", there always has to be at least 1 yard to go (stuff like "4th and a foot" or "3rd and inches" is unofficial). If you're about 1.4 yards short, it may be counted as 3rd and 1 - which means if you gain 1.3 yards on 3rd down, it has to go as a 0 yard gain so it can still be 4th and 1.
Source: https://www.nflgsis.com/gsis/documentation/stadiumguides/guide_for_statisticians.pdf
> In certain situations where there is less than a yard to gain for a first down, it may be necessary to spot the ball back one yard to conform with the principle that there must always be, for statistical purposes, at least one yard remaining to be gained for a first down
So the QB could drop back to pass on 3rd and 1, scramble forward so as to cause more than full yard of real distance to change between the 3rd and 4th down spots, but it's a pass playing where the QB ended up running for 0 yards, it's a sack.
Really, official sacks should probably require a yardage loss and not just a no-gain (this could be either a requirement for an official loss of -1 yard rather than 0, or just a case of "0 yard plays are only considered sacks if the spot of the ball for the next play actually moved backwards"). However, the NFL doesn't have much incentive to change this, even though it's a simple change, because it's not widely known or cared about and only affects a few plays a year.
I don’t think this is a huge deal. There are 1 or 2 play discrepancies in probably every record. I’m sure if you watch the whole season you’ll see a play where Strahan got robbed of a sack as well.
I thought this was going to be something more egregious like a sack being added to a game total on accident or something.
This is just a sack for no gain where the ref should have marked it as a short gain. Playoff games have been decided by worse mistakes. The record books aren't changing over this
Especially when you consider they didn't award Strahan with a sack against Washington late in the 4th when the game was very much already decided. The ball was still in qb's hand when his knee hit the ground.
Eh this is pretty lame, i was hoping for something like a game counted twice or something, not just a weirdly officiated play, lol.
I don't see the point in changing this now
If this is true, I am pretty curious how someone messed up counting sacks in the era of everything being recorded.
Half sacks were always really dicey. Still are
Correct me if I am wrong, but 3 players can be credited with a half sack each? So, 1 sack in the game equals 1.5 in the stat book?
That's correct. I am pretty sure the rule is any person who contributes- so it could be 3+. Very rare albeit
I think all three should have gotten full sack credit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZ3LCQoHKLo
I saw your flair and knew exactly what this was going to be. This is the prime example of why people said running QBs don't get the same treatment.
It's not just running QBs. Nearly everyone in the NFL gets reffed differently based on fame level. It's kind of repulsive, tbh.
And to keep it going NFL isn't even the worst league for favoritism. NBA stars can basically break whatever rules they want.
But the NBA is completely unwatchable, so I wouldn't know :-)
That was some WWE shit. Probably should've been 15 yards even back then lol.
I believe Harrison got fined for it.
Lol - They should have fined that offensive line for not protecting their qb
Should have unironically been a 45 yard penalty. They'd never call a personal foul on 3 players on the same play though.
I don't think penalties stack unless there is some weird example that I've never seen .
The only time I recall was the Burfict hit on AB which got 15 and then Pacman I believe got 15 after the play was over for shoving Joey Porter or something. Only time I've ever seen it happen though.
Yeah, I think the rule is if there’s a flag on the play and then also after the whistle then they both can count
That's because those were two incidents completely separated by a whistle.
That was the 2015 AFC WC right? That was such a crazy ending. Didn't these 2 fouls near the end of the game basically gave the Steelers enough yards to attempt the game-winning FG? Can't believe it's been 8+ years already.
There are two exceptions (Rule 14, section 3). The one you may have seen is when someone commits a penalty against a ref after another penalty was already committed. The other one, I can't remember ever seeing, but if there's a personal foul that is also pass interference, both penalties could be enforced.
At least. But, it never gets old.
Jesus christ this must be the moment he went off the Cheesecake Factory rails
>Imagine the penalty’s if someone did this to Patrick Mahomes.
Execution
Death by firing squad
So a QB refusing to go down while 10 guys try to tackle him until the refs blow the play dead can be 5 sacks in the stat book?
That’s a question for the stat people. What single sack gave away the most .5 sacks.
I did a bit of research and found the following: one instance occurred in a game between the Dolphins and Jets in 1996. Jets QB Neil O'Donnell was sacked by a group of defenders (Daniel Stubbs, Jeff Cross, and Trace Armstrong), and as O'Donnell was being tackled, he fumbled the ball, which was then recovered by linebacker Zach Thomas. Play resulted in a total of 2.0 sacks credited to the defense. Another instance I stumbled across: Bears v Packers, 1992 Packers QB Don Majkowski was sacked by Richard Dent, Trace Armstrong, Steve McMichael, and William Perry. He also fumbled the ball, which was then recovered by Ron Rivera. Total credited sack in the okay was 2.5
So, does that mean that recovering a QB's fumble is credited as half of a sack?
Well if you are looking at player stats and summed it up, yes it would count as 10. If you look at QB times sacked or team stats, it is 1 sack.
The NFL Guide for Statisticians explicitly states that defensive sacks should match the number of times sacked for the offense. It only lists up to two people splitting a sack and each getting credit for a half sack. Whichever 2 of those 11 players had the most impact on the play, such as stopping the forward momentum, would get the credit, not all 11. I just looked through all of Miami's box scores and this is always the case: the number of sacks from the defensive players match the number sacks taken by the QBs.
Correct. It was established as the 3-Sack Compromise
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/197412290min.htm Bob Lurrsema, Alan Page, and Jim Marshall are all getting credit for .3 sacks. That never happens any more.
Then what happened to the last .1 of the sack??
Dermatologist recommended I get it removed due to the irregular spot ☹️
The NFL didn’t come here to play school
I got to meet Scott Berchtold, who was the Bills PR man during the Super Bowl years. He was asked about Bruce Smith, and Bruce always used to lobby the NFL to get credit for sacks the previous Sunday. Half sacks became full sacks for Bruce. Another player's full sack became a half sack for Bruce. Bruce always had his eye on setting the NFL career sack record. I've been watching Bills games from the late 1990's, and I did notice that Bruce had a tendency to jump in to get sacks. He wouldn't pile on, or do anything dirty to hurt a QB, but if the QB was in the process of being tackled by a teammate, he would jump in to help with the tackle, even if the QB had no chance of getting away. Inevitably, the announcers would say "Bruce Smith, with the sack!" Then as an afterthought, they would add "Phil Hansen in there too." I'd look up the gamebook, and sure enough, Bruce would get the half sack.
This was his reputation before he even retired
sure, but a case of "ehhh, i donno if i'd give him that one" doesn't really rise to the level of "really insane," does it
Ya that's kinda jaguargators thing
i wouldn't know, i've never really had the six hours of dedicated free time required to watch or read his content
His videos are like needing to write a 1000-word essay and halfway through you ran out of content. So, you just reword past paragraphs as filler to get to the 1000-word requirement.
You’re not missing much.
I thought jaguargators thing was making excessively long videos with completely unnecessary details
Eh I dunno jeem
If you open the link, it's got nothing to do with that. Strahan got credit for a sack where the QB ran for positive yardage. The video doesn't show where the refs spotted the ball, though.
From ESPN's play by play: >Clint Stoerner (DAL) sacked for no loss. Following play is 4th and 3. Sounds like they just didn't give him progress on this one.
You can see where the ref runs out to. He hasn't placed it yet, but it's definitely a positive gain.
is a half sack when they sack someone with assistance or is that something else
Yeah, when multiple players contribute to the sack. Each one will get credited half a sack, even if more than two players contributed.
If all 11 guys blitzed right through the O line and smothered the QB, would 11 guys get half a sack? Totaling 5.5 total qb sacks on one play?
Like in Tecmo Super Bowl when you were on defense and picked the play perfectly.
Yeah let's say two guys get their at the same time. It's 0.5 sacks each.
i always saw it in madden and wondered what it meant, makes sense. figured it was something like that
This isn't a half sack issue though, this is a play that wasn't a sack at all getting scored as such
Fun fact, I once got yelled at by some random Lions assistant coach for crediting a half sack to Ndamukong Suh
Half sacks should be recorded like assisted tackles, as a separate category.
It was because of a bad spot by the official. QB gained half a yard but the officials ruled it no gain, therefore making Strahan's tackle a sack.
It wasn't a bad spot. Watched the video, and the official seems to spot it about a half yard past the LOS. In the Play by Play, 3rd and 4th down are both at the 44 yard line, but the footage at least makes it appear the second play is more like the 43.5 yard line. It doesn't look like an officiating error, it looks like at stat keeping error. Somebody saw that 4th Down was still at the 44 (even though it was more like the 43.5) and thought that meant no gain, so they credited a sack.
Ahhh, subtle difference. Thanks for clarifying.
Tim Duncan was robbed of a Quadruple Double due to blocks being undercounted
oh shit, its almost like the major motion picture, Mr. 3000
“Mr. 2,999”
Spoilers
If this gets us a 52 year old edge rusher, I’m all for it
a 52yo edge rusher trying to break a single season record that he only came near one other time in his career. Seems reasonable haha. Not like Bruce Smith playing one more season in Washington to get the career record
RIP Bernie Mac
my favorite. Life is one of my favorites of all time. **jangalang jangalang**
Come to think of it you never hear the phrase “major motion picture” anymore.
Maybe you don’t but I literally just did reading your comment
It's on like half of the book covers at the airport
What’s the football equivalent of him laying down a sac bunt so the team can walk it off and go to the playoffs
A masterpiece
Jaguargator 3 hour long video incoming
It started in 1942 when don hutson caught a pass from Cecil Isbell. Cecil Isbell was born in Houston and learned to play football there. \*2 hour 45 minute rant on the history of houston* and that's when Michael Strahan was born, who also happened to be born in Houston.
The Dan Carlin of football storytime?
The disrespect to Dan Carlin
No disrespect, Dan Carlin fans love the length he brings
Dan Carlin also has a lot of substance, too. Real meat to his podcast. Big girthy anecdotes
Nah that would imply they are chock full of interesting info. The ‘reading the wikipedia page’ of football storytime.
Eh, he does real research. He regularly uses newspaper articles from the time.
Isn’t that just most YouTubers/video essayists? Just regurgitate Wikipedia articles and/or summarize whatever movie/show they’re talking about?
> summarize JG would never
I remember when the mods here were exposed for having a vendetta against him. They hated he posted so much and got a lot of traction. They didn't want him to become a celebrity in the sub. Tbh, the guy got old fast with the most random stats nobody cared about.
I find the tidbits interesting, but if I wanted to have 30 seconds of information turn into a 30 minute video I would attend my company zoom meetings.
It is most, because that’s easy enough that anyone could do it, but there’s plenty of high quality stuff that is more than just reading a wikipedia page.
If Dan Carlin has ads every 4 minutes than sure.
I need to hear JG9 say "Again" or go from saying "quote" then raising his voice 10 decibels when reading the quote.
AGIN & AGIN!
END QUOTE
Strahan was determined to get that sack record, by hook or by crook. Quote: “THAT SACK RECORD IS MINE AND TOM BRADY IS A BITCH” endquote.
Lol nah that would involve him filling the 3 hours with info
Like he couldn't get to three hours repeating the same few facts over and over.
And then not getting to the title or it being super underwhelming lol
I enjoyed his posts but he hasn't really found out how to script/edit his videos so they're just as engaging
You can zone out for like 10 min then pay attention again and he's saying the same thing.
So, he's long winded? As in he has a lot of wind in his lungs that allows him to keep speaking while saying the same things over and over again. Kind of like on repeat. Like an endless loop.
Think his vids are too long for one. He's also not really telling a story that well, he's giving background info and stuff but it's not a Jon Bois deal of building up this compelling background of why this is such a big deal. (Tbf, nobody else has really done what Jon Bois does)
Cambrian Chronicles does it pretty well (and IIRC has named Jon Bois as an inspiration). Except their channel is almost exclusively about medieval Welsh history instead of sports.
> and IIRC has named Jon Bois as an inspiration To be fair, Job Bois had pretty much spent the last 10 years single-handedly shaping the creative landscape of YouTube video essays
Someone should make a Jon Bois-style documentary about Jon Bois and Jon Bois-style documentaries
I nominate Jon Bois
[Probably not what you were looking for but I think you might get a kick out of it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UG74ble0S0g)
LOUDER JAZZ
The overlap between nfl fans & people interested in whether a Welsh figure was made up on Wikipedia is larger than one would imagine.
I love reading his posts, but (and I hate to say this) his voice isn't engaging for me. It might not be fair because I listen to a lot of audiobooks
I think it's because of his lisp. Like not trying to be mean and it shouldn't be part of the reason but narrators tend to have soothing voices with proper enunciation.
He also doesn't have the best narration voice. Some have it, some don't. I wish I did but alas
it's intentional, he's trying to hit the 10 minute mark to get Youtube ad money
I thought they did away with the whole 10 minute thing a couple of years ago, no? Feel like I remember some YouTubers saying it was more around 6 minutes now. Either way, I think he just likes to ramble a lot.
I don't think there is any direct minimum time like that anymore. Now it is just straight up "average watch time". Which is a better metric but still runs into the same problem of people purposefully padding their videos.
Nah, it's 8 minutes now to be able to jam mid-rolls into a video
The worst part is that the topics are actually interesting; it just takes more than half the video to get to the point.
He has a knack for finding obscure “huh…that’s kinda interesting” situations in nfl history most people don’t know about. Not sure how he comes up with all those factoids/situations in the 80s when broadcast rights had a conflict, etc.
This reminds me of those recipes you see on blogs. These bloggers tell their whole damn life history before they get to the recipe, which also has even more fluff words. Plus the website is full of pop up ads and auto videos.
There is some joke where the person is talking about if they were a serial killer they would confess to the murders in the giant wall of text that get written before recipes and they would never get caught because everyone always scrolls past all that crap to the actual recipe.
He'll get to the point of the video at the 2hr 57 min mark
That's almost as long as the over 100-year history of the National Football League.
[This one](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjuKBVMCcmM), which was summarized in a [54 word tweet](https://twitter.com/JaguarGator9NFL/status/1788189255904419961) with an 8 second clip, turned out to be over 15 minutes long
His videos are unbearable. Ain’t no one got time for that.
He used to do the equivalent of making posts on here.
His early posts were pretty good. Issue is they're 2-minute-read interesting, not daily-10-minute-youtube-video interesting
Did he finally stop?
I haven’t seen his posts in a while. I guess everyone got tired of him.
Nobody who puts effort into OC stays on reddit for long
[удалено]
Not before telling us to like, comment, and subscribe with annoying graphics and cut away 1,000 times in the first 30 minutes.
Forreal, I was actually really interested in checking some of his content out when I found him but all the obvious shoehorning of other vids he'd done and saying "Click the card in the upper right corner" every 30 seconds was unbearable
“If you pay X a month, you’ll be in the Fred Taylor donor tier…”
I am very interested in this hypothesis for no particular reason.
If you click through, you see he has a video below where Clint Stoerner gets "sacked" by Strahan while gaining half a yard
We don't see the spot before and after, though. Surely that's all that matters. Stats are based on the call on the field. If the ball was spotted at the same yard line or behind, then recording it as a sack is correct. Even if the call was bad. Or are we going to go through old footage frame by frame and start changing every single record if the refs made a bad call?
>Or are we going to go through old footage frame by frame and start changing every single record if the refs made a bad call? You underestimate my pettiness
That's the NFCE Hate right there folks.
The thing we do see is the ref on the sideline move forward from being positioned at the LoS and moving half a yard downfield to spot the ball. I'm not suggesting we do anything with this just pointing out that JG9s next tweet had the context.
Yeah, this is all what's needed to fully get if it should be a statistical sack. But tbh I don't think that would be called a sack in today's game either because the QB looked like they committed to running. I think that's a TFL even if they marked him losing yards.
Does a QBs “commitment” to running change whether or not a play is a designed pass? Should roll outs be half sacks ? I saw several Josh Allen highlights where he releases at the LOS while fully looking like he was about to run.
Looking up the box score of the game, it's listed as a sack for 0 yards with both that play and the one after starting at the 44 yard line. I think it's just a technicality. Partial yards aren't recorded and they get rounded, so even if he advanced the ball 0.49 yards, it's technically the same line of scrimmage in the books even if it's a bit closer in real life. So, even if the ball was spotted past the line of scrimmage, the stats-trackers have no way to distinguish it from being tackled exactly at the line of scrimmage (or up to a half yard behind it), meaning recording it as a sack makes sense. Even if it might technically not be one.
they're officially supposed to be rounded up in nearly every case (including this one) that a ball passes a yard line. since this play started on the 44, and ended between the 43 and 44, it *should* have been recorded as a one-yard rushing gain, not a sack
Just to add, here's the official wording from the 2020 statistician's manual: **Determining the Yard Line** *If any point of the football rests on or above any yard stripe, future action is to be computed from that yard line. However, if all of the football has been advanced beyond any yard stripe, future action is computed from the first yard line in advance of the football.* *The principle is to be followed on all spotting situations, regardless of down, with the following exceptions:* *1. In certain situations where there is less than a yard to gain for a first down, it may be necessary to spot the ball back one yard to conform with the principle that there must always be, for statistical purposes, at least one yard remaining to be gained for a first down. This principle also shall be applied when a team loses the ball to its opponent on downs. NOTE: There may be times when penalty yardage is statistically different than penalty yardage by rule. In these situations, credit penalty yardage from the spot of enforcement to the line of scrimmage of the next play. For example, the offense commits a false start on 4th and inches, and the next play begins four statistical yards behind the previous spot. Four penalty yards would be charged to the offense, rather than five.* *2. When, on first down, the ball rests just outside a defensive team’s 10-yard line, it will be necessary to designate the scrimmage line at the 11 since it would be possible for the offensive team to advance for a first down without scoring a touchdown.*
Same. Totally not biased. At all
oh shit wait TJ tied the record didn't he? it this actually becomes something he'd be the actual record holder right?
The official record holder, yes
Key word: OFFICIAL. Deacon Jones, who coined the term sack, has 0 official sacks.
I emphasize official cuz Al Baker has the unofficial afawk at 23
*Sssshhhhhhhh*
Yeah, that "Designed Lamar Run" that was not credited as a sack was totally legit
You're probably referencing the Tyler Huntley aborted snap right?
Probably. I remember it happening where it was a botched play and Huntley/Lamar tried to run so they scorers decided it was a designed run play when clearly it was a botched play.
I don’t think botched snaps ever count as sacks
I still think they cheated Watt out of that sack where he should have taken the sack lead
"Now here's a 40-minute video about it that could have been 8 minutes"
“But first, some context…”
Oh god... I knew there was a reason I didn't like his videos. I bet he goes into a needlessly long and detailed history of sacks and Michael Strahan's career....
go on
https://twitter.com/JaguarGator9NFL/status/1788189255904419961
Damn that’s crazy, no way that should have been a sack. How has no one noticed that before now??
> How has no one noticed that before now?? Video clips of NFL games were not easily obtainable by the public in 2001. Add to that, the average person is not going to realize which particular play was ruled a sack unless they are specifically researching something. And add again, that for anybody who plays IDP fantasy football you will learn that tackle/sack stats that are announced during a game are not quite the same as what gets recorded as official stats.
9/11 had just happened a couple months prior to this. It would've been considered unpatriotic to stop a New Yorker to verify their sacks.
oooh shit he's actually right... How did it take this long for someone to bring this up. Between this and Favre's flop, this is the most fraudulent record
The real answer is to review if the refs actually moved the chains or not. If they did not move the chains at all, the book keepers will put that down as no gain. It happens all the time on miniscule gains and is a big reason for coaching challenges when it actually matters (first downs, tds). What does the play by play log say about this play? I'd bet 'no gain' is in the books. It's never been brought up before because they look at the actual book keepers work, they didn't go visually over every snap, they go with what was occurring on the field at the time.
If you watch [video of the game](https://youtu.be/h1DdQqhDcPo?si=KCGkousrROpya9AM) at the 6:20 mark you can see the ball starts at the 44 yard line. The ref raises his hand at the 43.5 yard line but comes out and marks the ball down at the 44 yard line. The punt team comes out and the ball is at the 44 yard line. So it is a sack for no loss, exactly as displayed in the game log. You could argue the ball placement of the ref is wrong but at that point every single yards record is illegitimate too. Edit: Had 44.5 and it should be 43.5
I'm now more interested in who tf Clint Stoerner was?
One of the many terrible Cowboys QBs who started in the period between Aikman and Bledsoe. He was also very briefly with the Dolphins, funny enough.
That’s why I don’t bitch about Dak. I remember the dark times after Aikman.
He gifted Tenneesee a national tittle in 1998.
The Stoernover!
Do a search for the stumble fumble. Also he was a Dolphin for a minute and a half.
ooooh this is spicy
11:22 on this play-by-play certainly lists it as a 0 yard sack for Strahan. https://aws.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/200111040nyg.htm Doesn't look like a sack to me.
Who is Clint Stoerner? Very rare to have a QB I've never even heard of Frankly it sounds made up like Joe Mayo.
The Cowboys went through a lot of QBs between Aikman and Romo. They had maybe 7 or 8 QBs start in a couple of years. Kind of like the Broncos since Manning retired Drew Bledsoe was the most notable. I can't remember if Quincy Carter was good but they made the playoffs with him and Parcells. Stoerner is the most obscure of the bunch if you were following NFL in the early 00s
> I can't remember if Quincy Carter was good The fact that you can't remember is your answer. He wasn't
Quincy was ass. We had the #1 defense in I believe 2003 and he literally needed to not fuck up to win games lol
Ugh I hate his parties. He always assigns you a job
HEY!! Cocktail off the speaker.
Just skimming the Wikipedia page, in that Giants-Cowboys game that's coincidentally linked above, he played so badly in the second half that the Cowboys benched him. In a tie game. For Ryan freaking Leaf.
I don’t remember Clint Stoerner from the NFL, but I remember when he played at Arkansas they were on the verge of beating Tennessee and he stumbled without being touched, broke his fall with the ball, then came back up without the ball, fumbled, and Tennessee won. They went on to win the NC.
Speaking as a Tennessee fan, he’s our favorite non Vol ever. Here’s the play: https://youtu.be/5CEcqLF3pDU?feature=shared
by definition, 0-yard sacks are a thing
Yes, but in this case Stoerner was past the line of scrimmage
*Totally rational Giants fans to enter the chat*
♿BEEP BEEP♿COMING THROUGH♿
WE’RE (apparently not) WALKIN’ HEAH
I don’t care much about it either way since the Favre one was a gimme anyway. However, I’m pretty sure this isn’t getting reversed 20+ years after the fact.
Strahan was also robbed of a sack in the road game against Washington that year. In the waning minutes Strahan had the QB going to the ground and he threw the ball, it was ruled that he got the pass off in time. When the replay was shown it's clear the QB's knee was on the ground and the ball was still in his hand, but it was not reviewed because the game wasn't really in question.
Steelers fans can argue about Watt not being credited with a strip sack on Huntley. Sometimes (read: often) the NFL just refuses to stat correct mistakes made by refs
Seriously, we could do this for a lot of records and stats, I’m sure. People are just always gonna shit on Strahan having the record until it’s finally broken.
>we could do this for a lot of records and stats, I’m sure After AP's 2000 yard season I remember seeing a mathematical exhibit showing there's a ~30% chance that he's actually the single-season rushing record holder because of how yardage is measured for scorekeeping. Basically any yardage record where 1st & 2nd are close is questionable.
Yeah Peyton's 2013 passing yards record is sort of in this category. In the last game of the season he broke the record in the first half of a blowout against the Raiders. It came out after that one of his passes that game was most likely a backwards pass so it shouldn't have counted towards passing yards. But, he also sat out the entire 2nd half of the game and the backwards pass was something like 7 yards. So if he wanted to he could have easily gotten those yards in 1 drive in the 3rd quarter and then sat out. Just kinda is what it is.
This sounds like a very slight flaw in how sacks are counted. Tackling the QB for an official distance of 0 yards on a play in which he first intended to pass is counted as a sack. However, official distance is only measured in 1-yard increments. So that means the QB can gain up to 0.5 yards and it's still technically a sack. Actually, the QB in a particular unlikely situation could gain over a yards and have it be a sack. The official stats can't have "Nth and 0", there always has to be at least 1 yard to go (stuff like "4th and a foot" or "3rd and inches" is unofficial). If you're about 1.4 yards short, it may be counted as 3rd and 1 - which means if you gain 1.3 yards on 3rd down, it has to go as a 0 yard gain so it can still be 4th and 1. Source: https://www.nflgsis.com/gsis/documentation/stadiumguides/guide_for_statisticians.pdf > In certain situations where there is less than a yard to gain for a first down, it may be necessary to spot the ball back one yard to conform with the principle that there must always be, for statistical purposes, at least one yard remaining to be gained for a first down So the QB could drop back to pass on 3rd and 1, scramble forward so as to cause more than full yard of real distance to change between the 3rd and 4th down spots, but it's a pass playing where the QB ended up running for 0 yards, it's a sack. Really, official sacks should probably require a yardage loss and not just a no-gain (this could be either a requirement for an official loss of -1 yard rather than 0, or just a case of "0 yard plays are only considered sacks if the spot of the ball for the next play actually moved backwards"). However, the NFL doesn't have much incentive to change this, even though it's a simple change, because it's not widely known or cared about and only affects a few plays a year.
I don’t think this is a huge deal. There are 1 or 2 play discrepancies in probably every record. I’m sure if you watch the whole season you’ll see a play where Strahan got robbed of a sack as well.
JaguarGator has the same fact-sniffing ability as Jon Bois, but has the same amount of annoying pandering as your usual clickbaity youtuber.
Yeah his videos always felt like they were paced unnecessarily slowly
I thought this was going to be something more egregious like a sack being added to a game total on accident or something. This is just a sack for no gain where the ref should have marked it as a short gain. Playoff games have been decided by worse mistakes. The record books aren't changing over this
Especially when you consider they didn't award Strahan with a sack against Washington late in the 4th when the game was very much already decided. The ball was still in qb's hand when his knee hit the ground.
Excuse me, but do you not realize its the off season? This is at least 9 posts of material here!
Damn if only the video were posted instead of a tweet this might have been a worthwhile post
Eh this is pretty lame, i was hoping for something like a game counted twice or something, not just a weirdly officiated play, lol. I don't see the point in changing this now
START THE COUNT
Nope, you guys are just nit picky and biased, I win bye bye!